PERMA-ZYME USA

“The Best in Soil Stabilization”

Soil Stabilization For

Road Construction & Natural Liners

Distributed in the USA Exclusively by: ENFRA, LLC

Enfra, LLC 4081 East la Palma Avenue, Suite A Anaheim, CA 92807 (800) 501-9007

Fax: (714) 630-5221 e-mail: charbon@pacbell.net

PERMA-ZYME

APPENDIX II

**************

TESTING

-

State of California Department of Transportation

Division of New Technology, Materials and Research Office of Geotechnical Engineering

Minor Research Report

ALTERNATIVE

CHEMICAL

SOIL STABILIZERS

June 30, 1993

Research Expenditure Authorization Subjob Research Identification

Principal Investigators…………………………………………...

Research Performed by…………………………………………..

Report Prepared by ............………………………………………

Report Edited and Reviewed by……………………………….

638041 33172 F93RM01

Rose Wright-Fox James G. Macfarlane

Rose Wright-Fox

Rose Wright-Fox

Roy F. Bibbens, G.E.

Transportation Engr. Technician

-

Introduction

This report documents procedures and presents results of strength and index tests for three proposed alternative soil stabilizers. The products tested were:

1. PZ-1 I Perma-zyme (an enzyme) 2. PZ-11X Perma-zyme (an enzyme)

3. RG-1 (an asphalt emulsion and lime additive product.)

Strength and index tests were directed and performed in Spring of 1993 by the Office of Geotechnical Engineering - Geotechnical Laboratory in Sacramento, Division of New Technology, Materials and Research. materials (PZ-1, PZ-11X and RG-1) were submitted by three suppliers Mr. Ray Hunter, Pragma, Inc. Of Sutter Creek, CA; Mr. G. Porter Pacific Enzymes, Sacramento, CA, and Mr. Robert 11. Crandall, Native Soil Technologies, Inc., Danville, CA.

Background

The above-mentioned three products have been suggested for use as alternatives to commonly accepted soil additives such as lime or cement. This study was conducted to perform an initial assessment Of stabilization potential that PZ-1, PZ-11x, and RG-1 may have upon soil.

Procedures

Since there are no standards or accepted test methods for testing the supplied stabilization products, some known test methods and tile procedures prescribed by the manufacturer/suppliers were used in fabricating and testing the specimens.

The soil used for sample fabrication and testing of tile control and test specimens was from a source at the Sacramento By Pass; located on State Route 16 between Roads 126 and 127 in Yolo County near the city of Bryte. The soil was a brown, silt and clay, with a liquid limit of 66%, and a plasticity index of 42% and was classified as a CII(fat clay) by tile unified classification system. The soil had a maximum dry density of 119 pfc at an optimum moisture content of 16 percent by California Test Method 216. See Table 1 for a summary of tile control soil index properties.

Samples tested consisted of specimens prepared from soil and water (control samples) and specimens. containing soil, water and an additive(s). Tests performed oil the samples were unconfined compressive strength test,

1

-

Tile additives PZ-1, PZ-I1x, and RG-1 consisted of a water base. Therefore, the moisture in the PZ-1, PZ-11x, and RG-1 products was considered as part of the optimum moisture in fabricating the specimens.

Specimen Set 1. PZ-1 2. PZ-11X 3. Control 4. 2% lime 5. RG-1 6. 2% lime - 7 day +4

Constituents soil, water and PZ-1 soil, water and PZ-11X soil and water soil, water, and 2% lime soil, water, RG-1 and 2% lime soil, water, 2% lime with an 11 day cure

Atterberg limit tests, gradation tests and immersion tests The following is a summary of tile specimen sets prepared for this testing program:

To conform to the fabrication process of one supplier who indicated that the product he represents is most effective for testing if the specimens are allowed to air-day for three days, and since no concern was expressed by the other suppliers to a proposed three day air cure, the strength specimens were air dried for a minimum of the stated time, except where noted.

Since the RG-1 specimens also had lime as an additive, additional specimens stabilized only with lime were fabricated and tested. This was necessary to separate tile stabilization effects of tile RG-1. and lime additives. Upon extrusion from the mold determination was made that the water added to the first set of lime treated soil specimens was not sufficient to hydrate the 2% lime. Furthermore, the three day cure little was not appropriately long enough for the cementation process to occur. A second set of lime treated specimens, using sufficient moisture and cure time was fabricated to facilitate these requirements.

During preparation of the test specimens it was noted that the RG-1 required extraordinary compactive effort in order to meet the target density. All other samples were comparatively similar, to one another, in required compactive effort.

The procedures used for specimen fabrication and testing appear in Appendix A.

Results and Discussion

Unconfined Compressive Strength

Figure 1 (attached) shows tile Unconfined compressive strength results for the

control and each product tested. The mean strengths are as follows:

2

-

Average Unconfined

Compressive Strength, qu

34.9 TSF 33.4 TSF 28.3 TSF 21.2 TSF 13.7 TSF 26.8 TSF

Specimen Set 1. PZ-1 2. PZ-11X 3. Control 4. 2% lime 5. RG-1 6. 2% lime - 7 day +4

PZ-1 and PZ-11x (Perma-Zyme)

Test results indicated that the undrained shear strengths of the Perma-zyme products were 21% higher than the control specimens. This suggests that these products, in the concentrations used, added a stabilizing quality to the relatively dry soil specimen.

2% Lime

The first set of lime specimens indicated a shear strength reduction of 25% from the control samples. As noted previously, the strength reduction was likely the result of insufficient water for hydration of the lime and a second set of 2% lime specimens was prepared and tested. The result of the second series of lime specimens is based on the average shear strengths of two specimens; the first specimen was inadvertently compressed before the cure cycle was complete. Based on that average, the strength of the 2% lime samples was approximately the same as the control.

RG-1

The test data for RG-I indicates that strength was reduced by 48Y% compared to the control samples. The asphalt emulsion used to stabilize the soil may increase lubrication of the soil particles; therefore lessening cohesion.

Index Tests

Table 1 shows the numerical data of the hydrometer, mechanical analysis, and Atterberg limit tests for the control and treated samples. The results of the index tests for the Perma-zyme products are virtually unchanged from the control.

The RG-1 product caused noticeable changes ill index test results. Because of the asphalt emulsion in the stabilizer, it may not lend itself to conventional classification/index testing. The emulsion floated freely within the hydrometer soil slurry, causing it to adhere to the hydrometer bulb and to the top of the inside of the hydrometer cylinder. This may cause

erroneous

I 3

-

hydrometer reading. And, after washing and drying the sample, the graduation could not be determined because the asphalt emulsion in the product dried into a large black mass in the bottom of the drying pan.

. The Atterberg limits results were also affected by the asphalt emulsion. The liquid limit was less than the control by 24% and the plasticity index was less by 55%. This indicates that the emulsion may cause a moisture barrier which does not allow easy rehydration of the test soil.

Immersion Test

This is a subjective test. The objective of the test is to simulate the most extreme wet conditions to which the tested products may be subjected, and consisted of immersing one of each type of fabricated specimen into distilled water contained in a glass beaker. The observation made during tile immersion of the test specimens are noted in Appendix B.

All but the RG-1 product nearly or completely disintegrated by slaking. The test indicated that the Perma-zyme products may not offer waterproofing qualities, using the recommended dilutions.

The RG-1, however, did not noticeably change form, when immersed. The implication is that RG-1 does have a waterproofing affect, when used in the recommended concentration.

Conclusions and Recommendations

It is concluded from this limited laboratory testing program:

• that the soil stabilization additives PZ-1 and PZ-11x may be of some benefit in providing additional shear strength for some soils.

• that the RG-1 product, because of its apparent waterproofing potential may be of some value when used as a shoulder backing additive, due to a potential for erosion resistance.

• that all the products tested might be considered for various applications but only on a case by case basis.

Based upon these conclusions it is recommended that consideration be given to a field research program, of several years duration, using these soil stabilizers on short sections of roadway and shoulders.

4

-

-

Table 1- Index Test Results

Lab

Gradation Analysis - % Finer Atterberg Compaction

Sand Silt/Clay Limits Ydmax

omc

Specimen Set #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200 5 M 1 M L.L. P. I. pcf %

PZ-1 - - - 100 99 98 95 68 46 63 41 - -

PZ-11x - - - 100 99 98 95 71 48 66 42 - -

Control - - - 100 99 98 95 71 48 66 42 119 16

2% Lime - - - 100 99 98 95 65 35 58 31 - -

RG-1 with 2% Lime* - - - - - - - 46 21 50 19 - -

2% Lime -7 day +4 100 99 99 98 96 94 90 56 25 51 23 - -

*Note: Gradation test data for the RG-1 with 2% lime sample could not be determined because the asphalt emulsion. See Text

- - 8 -

Appendix A The procedures used in sample preparation and testing are as follows:

1. Each sample set was prepared using 2000 grams of soil with a “bag” moisture content of 5.2 percent. After thoroughly mixing the soil, stabilizer and distiller water (if required) the mixture was hydrated in a sealed container for 24 hours.

Each product was proportioned using dilutions recommended by the manufactures/ suppliers of each product. • PZ-1 -Mix 5cc of PZ-1 and water to bring the mixture to a total of 207

grams; mix the PZ-1 and water solution with 2000 grams of soil. • PZ-11x -Mix 0.4cc of PZ-11x and water to bring the mixture to a total of

207 grams; mix the PZ-1 and water solution with 2000 grams of soil. • RG-1 -20% emulsion/2% (quicklime). Mix 381 grams of RG-1, 38

grams of quicklime, and 25 grams of water (to hydrate lime), and 2000 grams of soil. RG-1 consisted of 66.7 percent water.

• CONTROL -Mix 207 grams of water with 2000 grams of soil • 2% Lime –Mix 225 grams of water, 38 grams of lime (an additional 18

grams of water was added to hydrate the lime).

2. Based on the Moisture/Density curve, as determined by California Test Method 216, fabricated at 95 percent relative compaction 6 sets of 4 each, 2 inch diameter by 4 inch high, cylindrical specimens. The final compacted weight of each specimen is 378 grams.

3. Cure for 72 hours, unsealed (out of tube) on top of the “Lab” oven which has an ambient temperature of approximate 25°C

4. Performed unconfined compressive strength tests in accordance with California test Method 221.

5. Perform hydrometer, mechanical analysis and Atterberg Limit test on untreated and treated soil, in accordance with California Test methods 203 and 204.

6. Observe (one each) test specimen as it is immersed in a 2000 ml glass beaker filled with 1400 ml +/- of distilled water

-

Appendix B Immersion Test Results PZ-1* complete deterioration PZ-11x some deterioration CONTROL some deterioration Lime 2% complete deterioration RG-1 no deterioration Lime –7 day +4 complete deterioration *No Drying Cycle

-

-

-

-

-

RANDLE & ASSOCIATES OF NEVADA INC.. 3110 POLARIS UNIT #8 C. J. RANDLE P.E. LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89102 SOILS, ASPHALT, CONCRETE President TELEPHONE (702) 362-3510 QUALITY CONTROL FOR CONSTRUCTION

September 22, 1982

Dear Sir:

Enclosed are the results of tests completed at your request. The following is an outline of the procedure used:

1. The maximum dry density/optimum moisture relationship was determined for the gravel sample with the use of water only.

2. A check point was tested at optimum moisture with 0.2% enzyme solution added.

3. Three sets of 2 soil cylinders each were remolded with the following added:

Subject: Laboratory Testing - Enzyme Solution

a. Set one- water only – optimum moisture b. Set two – water plus 0.2% enzyme solution- optimun

mositure c. Set three – water plus 0.2% enzyme solution- optimun

moisture minus 2%.

The test results indicate a definite increase in the unconfined compressive strength after the seventy-two hour period. The results also suggest a decrease in the amount of water needed, to increase the strength of the soil. The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions or if clarification is needed, please contact our office at your convenience.

4. The six soil cylinders were removed from the molds and dried for 72 hours at a constant temperature of 100° F.

5. The samples were then tested for unconfined compressive strength. The results are outlined herein.

RANDLE & ASSOCIATES OF NEVADA INC.

RANDLE & ASSOCIATES OF NEVADA INC.

This letter briefly summarizes the laboratory test results we performed on liner soils from the MGSD facility. Samples of the liner were compacted to two different compaction efforts, 85% and 93% compaction (ASTM D1557 test procedure). A second set of samples of the liner material mixed with a weak Perma-zyme solution were prepared at 85% and 93% compaction and allowed to air dry for three days. Then, permeability tests were performed in our laboratory

• Soils compacted to 93% compaction showed permeabilities approximately two to five times

slower than soils compacted to 85% compaction

• A strength increase of 10% was obtained for the soils mixed with the Perma-zyme; a much greater

Strength increased is expected as the treated soils are allowed to age.

The test results, coupled with the testimonials of several past uses of the Perma-zyme product, lead us to recommend that the Board include the use of this product in the rehabilitation of the MGSD storage ponds.

A more detailed report, complete with laboratory backups, will be prepared within the next week and will be forwarded to you.

CMW:slm

Copyright 1991 Kleinfelder, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Kleinfelder, 3189 Mill Street, Reno, NV 89502 (702) 323-7181

Minden Gardnerville Sanitation District P.O. Box 568 Minden, NV 89423

Attention: Mr. David La Barbara

Subject: Effectiveness of Perma-zyme to Reduce Liner Permeability MGSD Effluent Storage Facility, Minden, Nevada

Gentlemen:

File: 30-14M-03.001 October 1, 1991

Very truly yours,

• Soils prepared with the Perma-zyme solution showed permeabilities approximately four times

slower than soils not containing the solution.

Mr. Steve Studer Washington Construction Box 8989 Missoula, Montana 59807

Dear Steve,

I have enclosed some typical data from our Mill Road enzyme base project. The nuclear compaction data is for the first 3" lift of treated base only. We usually lay 2-three inch compacted lifts on our roads as normal processes. I didn't bother to have the second 3" lift tested because of the expenses. My men have become very efficient at laying enzyme roads. Our road crewleader has about 11 years of SCS experience of which approximately 5 years were spent in laboratory testing. If you have technical questions to ask I can have him call your engineers.

As mentioned this is our third season with Permazyme. We feel it is the best product of its kind; probably in the world. We have looked at another enzyme product making similar claims only to find more "hot air" than fact ! The first noticeable thing to us was that "the competition" would have to sell us 3 to 4 times more of their product to accomplish the equivalent amount of treatment. The costs would be staggering compared to Permazyme. Also "the competition" has various conditioned recommendations for application which could delay processes while waiting for ideal situations to develop. Frankly we are staying with the company which developed the concept and the product. I understand that "the competition" is about to go under and has been a "copy cat" garage operation all along. They never could crack the Permazyme formula which they tried.

Our relationship with the Permazyme people has been very good. The product is great, service excellent with assistance and followup the best that I have seen for any product. Of course another problem has been overcome using Permazyme, the EPA! They can't fault the product in anyway. This is particularly exciting to me as a Road Supervisor when we are usually being "hammered" for one thing or another by the Feds (EPA,DOGM,MSHA,BLM, etc.).

As mentioned we are now into our third season using Permazyme. YOU mentioned that your application would be for a haulway so I can heartily recommend this product. I believe that It is a most cost effective long term product to that end. I have enclosed a couple photographs taken on the Consolidation Coal Company haulway last year. Two years ago we treated the base of this roadway to a depth of six inches. The one closeup photo shows the road before chips. It looks like concrete!

Letter to Washington Construction June 1, 1990 Page Two Most impressive to me was that this picture was taken almost 2 months later after the enzyme treatment. State Highway U10 adjoins this roadway so the coal carriers access our road from there. Interesting to see that Highway U10 is all rutted out, Consol Road is not. The coal carriers were in a state regulation battle and were running double maxi trailers using triple axles with single 7 11211 wide tires which really wasted state roads before they could rewrite regulations. Our road was not hurt above minor loss of the chip seal coating on two curve situations.

The coal trucks managed to scrub off the double chip seal surface on the road supers (with their narrow tires) within 2 months of original application which concerned us at first. Being late in the fall we decided to allow Permazyme to prove its case. We left the exposed portions of roadway to snow, ice, rains and spring thaws. We were impressed as very little damage was noted on the exposed base. We watched and clocked the 127,000 GVW units "stick her right down the middle" coming and going night and day; dry or wet. The average haul speed was 40-45 mph.

All we did to patch the "bald" spots was take some MC 250 track oil and chips out and fill the scrub zones. Two months later we rechipped this road with one single layer of chips and CRS2H (Latex) emulsion ontop of the repairs and old chips. One year later no bald spots. The ADT figures for the 7 days (before they really got busy as it turned out) were 46 loaded double units (1 way) per day and 141 conventional 2 axle one way passes daily. As mentioned when IPP stockpile demands increased after that time the mine went to 3 shifts for truck loading.

Because of the mild cementation action of the enzyme dust Is very much kept to minimal appreciable levels. I have a road treated to 411 of depth with Permazyme which we deliberately left unmaintained for over 16 months. Formerly our district grader operator devoted 1 to two days per month blading it. Normally after 2 years we would be ready to regravel this road. However we still have gravel and acceptable road conditions after the 2 years and 2 months and maintenance is still minimal. The ADT on this recreation road is about 250300 as it accesses the reservoir and the mountains. Ask me if we are pleased!

Emery County has 1200 miles of roads to "tend" within 14300 square miles of territory; we stay busy. About 950 miles are native and gravel surfaced roadways. We have enzymed about 40 miles of connector roads between our small towns. These roads prior to Permazyme required alot of grader maintenance and our jurisdiction was structured into 7 grader districts.

Letter to Washington Construction June 1, 1990 Page Three

Since Permazyme we now have 5 grader districts instead of 7. We also have spill over work and assist the Castle Valley Special Service District as well as Emery County Special Service District #1. We needless to say do not mind helping serious inquiries into the benefits of Permazyme. I personally feel that any operation seriously considering efficiency and cost effectiveness will "scrounge" up enough for 3 barrels of Permazyme and see for themselves. The three barrels will treat 611 of base material on a 241 wide roadway one lineal mile long.

Under sanction of our Commissioners we maintain open files and assist any and all inquires concerning Permazyme.

enclosure

note: Material taken from the Pit is referred to as conglomerate.

MILL DAM ROAD Emery County, Utah

Road Construction Data from Emery County Road Dept Nuclear Relative Compaction Test Data

Lab test - Opt. Moisture 6.3% - Density of 138 lbs/cu ft. (water only)

Conglomerate Conglomerate w/dirt Road Samples

SIEVE Percent Passing Percent Passing Percent Passing

3/4" 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

1/2" 85.50% 81.70% 85.60%

3/8" 70.50% 72.10% 76.30%

#4 54.20% 56.90% 62.60% taken after

#8 43.60% 47.80% 55.80% road finished

#16 36.10% 41.80% 50.90%

#50 24.40% 32.40% 37.70%

#200 15.90% 22.40% 19.10%

Field Test # % Moisture Dry Density w/ PERMA-ZYME 6.10% 135.52 98.20%

2 6.10% 140.62 101.90%

3 6.00% 136.76 99.10%

4 7.00% 138.28 100.20%

5 5.50% 139.93 101.40%

6 5.90% 141.73 102.70%

7 5.60% 127.10 92.10%

8 6.00% 134.55 97.50%

9 5.80% 139.66 101.20%

10 5.60% 143.38 103.90%

11 5.20% 142.69 103.40%

12 5.80% 137.17 99.40%

13 6.80% 138.28 100.20%

% COMPACTION

GRADATION TEST RESULTS - PERCENT PASSING Pit Material, Blended Pit material with soil, and Road Sample in place.

Mr. Y. Y. Chan 2717 Sunset Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90026 Dear Mr. Chan; I hope that you enjoyed your short visit to Emery County. We were pleased to show you some of the PermaZyme roads conveniently located near our headquarters. I felt that it would be important to show you PermaZyme roads having no seal or asphalt top surfaces. This of course allows you to observe roads actually having the treatment but which receive very infrequent grader maintenance. In each instance you observed roads which had not been bladed for months. Our records of course support our argument for using PermaZyme. As mentioned during our tour of the Ferron Canyon road, after 7 years of normal activity we should have expected to have had to regravel this roadway two additional times, had we not used PermaZyme. This road had required usual blading about every 2-3 weeks and now is bladed perhaps four times each year which is significant. Incidentally the Ferron Canyon road was our first attempt at using PermaZyme and obviously still seeing the original gravel in place and the stability of the roadway has been encouraging to us not to mention cost effective for Emery County. I mentioned records keeping earlier and this is an important issue to focus on for a moment. It is human nature to forget important things after a relatively short period of time so records are valuable. for reference. There have. been. comments from PermaZyme users in other areas indicating that the dirt roads were still slick, though improved, when wet. They observed that vehicle tires still left tracks perhaps 1/2-1" deep in the roadway. I asked them what was the condition of the roadway before the use of PermaZyme? They would often comment that the roads were impassable or very difficult to drive on with numerous occasions when vehicles had to be pulled out of the mud by 4-wheel drive trucks or tractors. I would then ask isn't that a significant difference using PermaZyme? They of course agreed that there was a very notable benefit using PermaZyme. Again I emphasize the importance of keeping good records simply because people often forget past experiences.

Letter to Y. Y. Chan November 5, 1993 Page Two There is another point that comes to mind and that is PermaZyme does not turn a dirt or gravel road into concrete. This seems to be everyone's expectation at first use. It does not turn the roads into concrete however our observations have been that it does bind the materials in mass creating greater stability and load bearing quality to our roadways. You can still expect gravel to work loose on the surface, which is usual, but in our region the roads retain their structural integrity. Another thought that most user have is does PermaZyme prevent water from soaking into the roadway? -Again our-observations have been that because PermaZyme tightens soils (if properly compacted) water penetration is reduced. Some have asked if we recommend PermaZyme where ground water is close to the surface? I would say no unless you observe the fundamentals of good road building first. You must provide drainage to conduct the waters away from the roadway. We use many culverts and take the extra steps necessary to channel the waters away from the road. In areas where subsurface waters prevail we construct that portion of the road with heavy aggregate before laying the PermaZyme treated road base on the surface. Often in our industry it is necessary to create "French drains" under the roadway by depositing heavy rock underneath in order to allow the water to pass through while preserving the strength of the road structure above. These features are best determined by an engineer however I am sure in your provinces there are many ancient roads where your ancestors filled the swamp areas with rock where roadways crossed before placing the dirt surface on top of the road. The basics of road budding makes allowance for past experience and science; we should learn from former mistakes. Several years ago Emery County had serious road-problems. Our 1100 miles of road network represented primarily 900 miles of native soils that required very frequent maintenance activity because of increased recreational visitors and general _population increases. Our budget would not allow for extra employees or equipment. I learned of PermaZyme through a very knowledgeable road supervisor from Jerome, Idaho. He told me of his successful use of PermaZyme and invited me to visit his district to see for myself. I did so and was so impressed that I purchased PermaZyme that year. In two years we were enabled to eliminate one district motor grader station and use that man in the other areas where we were not permitted to hire additional employees. This reduced the size of our necessary equipment fleet by one motor grader! PermaZyme is a very cost effective program for Emery County. During your visit I indicated that the local engineers were so impressed with our successes with PermaZyme that they have specified its use in the Emery County Service District #1 road projects.

Letter to Y. Y. Chan November 5, 1993 Page Three I understand that a video has been released abroad that has an interview with myself regarding our use of PermaZyme. I stated that it is a poor road supervisor who cannot find a little money to try PermaZyme on a test strip of road for personal observations. This product has worked very well in our region in various soils. I am confident that it will work well in many regions if properly applied. You had asked if I would contact our local road contractor regarding his sending a crew of workers to China to build 10 miles of roadway with PermaZyme. I called Mr. Wayne Nielson of Nielson Construction Company (801-687-2494) and conveyed your message and he said that he would contact you. I hope that he does. You also asked what type of equipment that we recommend to mix and lay PermaZyme. The answer is relative to how much you wish to accomplish each day and that of course includes availability of resources providing manpower, equipment and materials. On our limited budget we use 3-20 cubic yard bottom dump truck/trailers, 2 motor graders (model 140G Caterpillar), 1-12 ton rubber tire roller, 1-14 ton tandem steel drum vibratory roller; one or two 5000 gallon water truck/trailer(s) as needed. Naturally you would need a water pump to load the water trailer or truck. The PermaZyme is added to the water and dispensed into the road materials being mixed by the graders then piled up in a windrow for the night to be laid down and compacted the following morning. This size of our work force allows us to lay about one mile of PermaZyme per day. You will want the materials to be ready the day before you mix the PermaZyme, that way there will be no unnecessary delays waiting for delivery of the dirt and gravel. This also keeps the truck crew busy and ahead of the mixing and lay down crews. Again we allow the PermaZyme treated base materials to sit overnight in the windrow which allows the PermaZyme to thoroughly penetrate the base materials before lay down and compaction. For a normal roadway we plan to lay 6" of PermaZyme treated base material. After mixing, the graders then pull the treated materials out of the windrow (situated on the road shoulder) and onto the roadway. We do this in several passes pulling out and laying 1-11/2" of thickness each pass with a grader. As the grader lays the material the rubber tire and vibratory rollers compact the materials. On the very final layer the steel drum roller finishes compaction and the vibrator feature is not used. We typically continue to lightly moisten and roll the top surface for 2-3 additional hours as needed or until there is a sealed "concrete looking'' appearance then we are finished. The road should then be allowed to dry 72 hours even though traffic can use the roadway immediately after the PermaZyme is laid. The field formula remains 1 gallon of PermaZyme solution to 15 cubic yards of dirt materials.

Letter to Y. Y. Chan November 5, 1993 Page Four Remember that optimum moisture must be maintained at all times. You do not want the materials too wet or too dry. As mentioned engineering supervision is very beneficial. In the field if the PermaZyme has been properly mixed into the materials at the rate of 1 gallon per 15 cubic yards of material and the material is still too dry you can add straight material to optimum moisture. When we lay the material the following day (after the PermaZyme materials have been windrowed the night before) we often moisten the roadway moderately before laying the mixture down and compacting. We moistened the road using a solution of a gallon PermaZyme to 1000 gallons of water. 1 gallon PermaZyme mixed in 1000 gallons of water as wetting agent to bring the I hope this information is helpful for you. I cannot speak regarding use of PermaZyme in your region I simply advise that you do a portion of road and make your observations before a large project. As stated PermaZyme is a very good product for Emery County and has saved us thousands of dollars in maintenance and materials costs. If I can provide further information I will be glad to do so. I apologize for being late in writing to you we are quite involved in our 1994 budget processes.

April 21, 1987

Re: Perma-Zyme treated Heap Leach Pad Dear Mr. Battistoni, Enclosed you will find three test reports which were prepared in conjunction with the construction of our 11 acre Heap Leach Pad and ‘Pregnant Ponds’ used at the Morning Star Mine (Cactus Hill Project managed by Heavy Metals Development Corp.). We looked at the feasibility of using existing soil, adding Clay and possible use of bentonite. All test work was done using Perma-Zyme, which was used in the construction of the Pad. We decided to use only alluvial soil in place plus a blend of local clay. After constructing the pad a test was performed on core samples of the finished pad. Results of the permeability test showed permeability in the range of 6 x 10 -6 which was in excess of design requirements. The finished pad will hold approx 1.5 million tons of processed gold bearing rock which will be treated with Cyanide solution. The pad has HDPE liners over the Perma-Zyme treated soil to facilitate collection of gold bearing solution. It was noted during construction that the soil was easier to compact and work. Densities were easily achieved. We were very pleased with the results that Perma-Zyme made possible. We have included a picture of the Morning Star Mine showing the Pad which was on the cover of a recent issue of the California Mining journal. Thank you for your able assistance. Best Regards, John F. Jordan President

PERMA-ZYME - A NEW APPROACH TO ROAD STABILIZATION By Boyd J. Brownfield, P.E.

Director, Central Region M & 0 Anchorage, Alaska

Picture this! It's spring, the subbase goo (pronounced "elephant dung") is boiling and oozing up

through your gravel roads. They are all but impassable. The phone is ringing off the hook with some of the state's finest critics having relatively unkind things to say about your roads, your employees, your wife, kids and ancestors and there's absolutely nothing that can be done about it. Sound familiar? - Like the spring of '94?

ENTER - a new product called PERMA-ZYME. This stuff is supposed to stabilize some of the worst roads. It solidifies the very materials that you and I have been taught never to leave in a road bed; that elephant dung we traditionally find oozing out of our roads each spring making forward motion of any motor vehicle all but impossible.

Earlier this year I was asked by my boss, John Horn, to look into this product to see if it had any application in Alaska. That we did and found some pretty impressive results.

PERMA-ZYME is a liquid product which, when mixed with certain types of earth materials, alters the properties of these materials to produce a solid, almost rock-hard material. It actually fuses them together to creates a very dense and permanent base which resists water penetration, weathering and wear. AND, the process is no more difficult than watering,

ing/regrading and compacting the road bed as we now do to our non-paved roads each summer. There is, of course, one important exception. Under the present mode, the fruit of our labors generally lasts about two weeks, unless, of course, it rains, then we

can count in terms of days. PERMA-ZYME on the other hand, if applied correctly, lasts for years.

Sister States and County Road Commissions have had some of their roads last up to 7-8 years at which time they ended up paving or chip sealing right over the existing road bed. I personally researched this product and talked at some length with DOT and County Road Officials from Pennsylvania, Idaho and Nevada. Without exception, they all rave about this product and have used it from four to about ten years.

Let's take the "It is too good to be true" first. PERMAZYME isn't the answer to every unstable road bed. It will not work on all kinds of soils in every instance. A road bed composed of purely silt, sand and gravel with no organic material, clay or cohesive materials characteristics will not react with this product. If your soil does not have any ability, when wetted, to stick together, it probably will not work with PERMA-ZYME. In fact, as a quick test, take a handful of your soil, wet it to an estimated optimum water content and try to make a ball out of it. If it sluff s off and falls apart, forget PERMA-ZYME. It's too good to be true.

Now let's take the latter. Since there are several points to be made in favor of PERMA-ZYME, I will number them.

much like a snow ball - and you get compaction and cohesiveness, chances are the soil will respond to PERMA-ZYME. PERMA-ZYME works best in soils having 18% to 30% passing the #200 sieve. THAT'S

Does all this sound too good to be true?? WELL, it is and it isn’t.

RIGHT, 30% passing the #200 - that's the soil you and I were taught to dread and get rid of at all costs; the soil that principally causes the ugly breakups we (and the rest of the world) have each spring. It will work with less passing this sieve; these percents render optimum results. Now for a "kicker." If your soil falls into the "Too-Good-To-Be-True" category, go find some elephant dung and mix it. Proof! - it changes categories.

(2) ROAD BUILDING: PERMA-ZYME is easy to apply and requires no special equipment or application procedures. It can be mixed with a recycle machine right on the job site when sufficient "cohesive" fines are present or combined with appropriate imported fines when not present. The process requires a road grader for mixing, spreading and crowning, a water truck to dispense the mixture and a roller (wobbly wheel, vibrating steel drum, sheepsfoot, etc.) to compact the new surface.

A typical operation would include:

Blading the existing bed to a depth of 4-5 inches and windrow loose material. Unless the road lacks sufficient material or is of the wrong consistency, there is no need to bring more in. Remember, the soil must be of the "elephant dung" quality.

Adding PERMA-ZYME to a tanker of water. The PERMA-ZYME comes in 5 gallon drums. It takes three drums to treat one mile of road, 25 feet wide, 6 inches deep.

Spray both the bladed surface and windrow to obtain optimum moisture content. Blend the PERMA-ZYME mixture well into the soil with a blade or pulverizer. While it is not necessary, it is desirable to leave the mixture in a windrow along the side of the road overnight. This allows the PERMA-ZYME to be thoroughly blended.

Spread the windrows over the roadbed and blade the road to a final crown. Compact with a sheepsfoot, pneumatic or other type compactor during the process. If the mixture gets too dry on a hot day during the process, apply a light mist of PERMA-ZYME/water (ratio of .1 to 1,000) over the road. If a vibrator roller is used, use the vibrator only for the first and second pass. After

that, turn it off so that fracturing will not occur. And there you have it. The road is ready for action using simple, straightforward common road building procedures.

(3) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: You can drink it (although there are better products on the market to quench one's thirst). You can feed it to your kids, animals, fish or vegetation and it will harm no one. It's biodegradable.

Now all this may sound too good to be true, but it ISN'T. It is true!

We in the Central Region have already used it on several roads throughout our region. So far the roads treated are extremely hard and stable. Even those stretches on which we didn't do a particularly good job of application. We are also applying it to a local gravel air strip. The real test, of course, will come next spring. I am both hopeful and confident and will pass on results in the appropriate future newsletter.

Should it prove successful, it will not only free precious manpower for other needed maintenance but I believe it will revolutionize the way we deal with the gravel roads as well as road beds for our major highways, slope stabilization and a host of other applications. If it doesn't work - well - I'M LEAVING DODGE!

Feel free to call me at (907) 266-1735 if you have any questions.

Reprinted with permission of Boyd J. Brownfield

Jerome County has a large influx of

dairies the past 15 years. This has thrown an extra burden on our county road system due to the increase in traffic. Our old price coat asphalt roads just would not support this traffic load. We spent all our time patching holes and breaks. We tried other types of asphalt surfaces, double chip seal coats and two inch mats, but were still having problems with base failure.

In the fall of 1982, we tried PERMA-ZYME Enzyme (supplied by Idaho Enzyme, Inc., Jerome) on a 1/2 mile test section of gravel road for dust control. This test was not entirely successful for controlling 100% of the dust and we were not very satisfied. We did notice the road stayed quite stable and smooth, except for a short section by the "Stop" sign which had some rutting left from the application process.

In the spring of 1983, while blading gravel roads, one of our grader men pulled onto the rutted section of the 1/2 mile test section, dropped his blade and got sparks and smoke. He got out and found the road base so hard and dry he could not cut it with the blade. It was so hard I could not drive a crowbar into the surface. Right then we realized we had something far more important than dust control; base stabilization. We left this 1/2 mile section in gravel to observe it, and treated another three miles and put a double chip seal asphalt coat on top of the PERMAZYME base. This road is still free of any breaks, potholes, cracks or frost damage eight years later.

In the spring of 1985, one section of this road was under water for a period of 21 days with traffic running through it. The treated base did not soften or fail, and today, six years after the flooding, no damage is apparent. We were so pleased with the

Jerome Highway District tests successful enzyme product for road base stabilization

Reprinted with permission of Idaho Technology Transfer Center

Box 7129 - Boise, Idaho 83707-1129

performance of the treated base, we have put it down on 40 miles of new asphalt surfaced roads, using mostly the more economically double chip seal surface and several miles of two inch cold mat surface. We have had virtually no patch or repair work on any of these roads, except some minor frost damage in the hard winter of 1988. We had some sections of our newest constructed roads lift in the sub-zero weather due to the submoisture from pivot sprinklers spraying the roadway and flooded barrow pits the fall before, but even then most of these sections went back down intact without usual breakup. After leaving our original 1/2 mile test section in gravel for three years, without any grader maintenance, we added some PERMA-ZYME to our water truck, sprayed this enzyme mixture to soften the surface and tight bladed it, compacted it and applied a double chip seal asphalt surface. Even then we left a 200 foot section unpaved until this last fall. After eight years, this treated section was still so hard and smooth we couldn't cut it with a blade. We covered it with a double chip seal coat when we continued to oil the rest of the mile section. As you drive over this mile road, you can't tell any difference in the old or new section, except by appearance of surface oil color.

Every year we try to add five or six miles of new asphalt road in our district. We take an old gravel road, blade up the barrow pits, shape and crown it, and treat three inches of this existing material with PERMAZYME. Then in the fall of the year, or at our convenience, we haul another three inches of crushed, dirty gravel, (dirty meaning at least 15 to 20% passing a 200 screen), smooth it out and leave it untreated for the traffic to drive on, usually over the winter months. We have waited as long as

two years, before placing the asphalt, but our usual procedure is to follow up the next summer by adding water and PERMA-ZYME to the top three inch lift, mixing and compacting and covering it with the double chip seal. Either emulsion or cut back asphalt works, but in our county I always used .5 gallon of MC 800 per square yard with 3/4 inch of 3/4 minus clean gravel. This was followed with .4 gallon of MC 3000 per square yard and 1/2 inch of 112 inch chips. We drag a non-rotating broom over the surface between layers to smooth the 3/4 gravel before shooting the MC 3000. This removes any roughness caused by the chip spreader, trucks and roller.

We use PERMA-ZYME to stabilize road shoulders, if we plan an overlay on existing narrow asphalt roads. We have a lot of 20 foot wide asphalt roads in need of repair. We treat four foot of shoulder on each side of the oil with PERMA-ZYME, compact it, and then overlay the existing 20 foot roadway with reclaimed asphalt two inches deep and 24 feet wide. The stabilized shoulder not only holds up the new asphalt shoulder, but stops moisture from migrating under the existing roadway.

The PERMA-ZYME treatment is very economical. It is also very easy to use; the only extra labor or effort required is to pour or pump it into your water truck. It is totally non-toxic, requires no protective gear for the men, is environmentally safe, and will not damage or corrode equipment.

If you have any questions about our program, you can call me at Jerome, (208) 324-8303, or the new Jerome County Road Supervisor, LeRoy Lewis, at (208) 324-4601.

-Clarence Miller Jerome Highway District Supervisor (retired)